What if we go with the idea of a damage boost against Boss/EB/AV/GM class mobs?
"I never said thank you." - Lt. Gordon
"And you'll never have to." - the Dark Knight
Damage comes at a price. What will you be willing to give up for it?
Frankly why add anything to the AT?
Tanks solo fine after the early levels (a trait we share with trollers) judging by the number I see around in game plenty of folks are playing them, and judging from the tells I get while on one of mine and the chatter I see on teams they are highly sought after by teams.
We have two changes impacting the teaming enviroment. The addition of the MA, which seems to increase the demand for tanks due to the higher relative difficulty of the spawns. And the forthcoming addition of side switching, which is far more likely to put the tankerminds and tankish brutes out of work than it is to reduce the demand for a true tank.
So I ask again why do anything to tanks? (and I do not accept JBs semantic jibberish as a valid argument).
Taking It On the Chin I-16 Tanker Guide
Repeat Offenders
[ QUOTE ]
What if we go with the idea of a damage boost against Boss/EB/AV/GM class mobs?
[/ QUOTE ]
Would you accept one if it came with a corresponding decrease in defenses vs the same mobs? If the answer is yes, then you really want to play a Scrapper.
My 2 cents worth for whos listening is that stone armor brutes are like tanks the rest are more like scrappers. Stone armor brutes will pick up for tanks that want to do more damage the other AT's will be for scrapper alts. IO's already merge what roles ppl play so arguing these points are moot. The only time i notice tanks have become "tanks" again is AE content. Other than that im a weak scrapper and would be just a weak brute redside. until my team runs up against a foe that the scrapper/brute can't tank (damage mitigation through superior offense isn't enuff) i.e. 54 bosses then ppl say hey tank i love you buddy otherwise even now im disregarded. so i c this argument as an argument of the allowance of even more ppl to get the 'oneupmenship' of my AT. Logically therefor either an increase in extreme dmg mitigation required content or a redefinition of AT roles and numbers will transpire. I believe the latter will occur and this will cross ALL AT's. we can concentrate on comparing things that will probably not matter at the launch of rouge (or not matter soon after they catalog and compair data archives) or we can concentrate on acquiring the required information to successfully gauge the future direction of our beloved game. ASK questions constantly of the devs until we have more than just rampant speculation. this can be a groundbreaking expansion if handled properly and filtered through the community (in the end this game is a business and they have to cater to the needs of their customers) alot of what ppl have regarded as 'broken' can be fixed with the increased depth of choices within these AT blurs or the redefinition of roles, again IF handled properly. this will always be the point where this argument becomes productive or pointless, where we know and where we speculate
[ QUOTE ]
The changes with the other AT were made to enhance the core purpose of the AT.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tankers already fulfull their core purpose too well in some cases. That is not the area causing deficiency, so it is not the area that needs attention.
Nor should we invent a "new area" for Tankers when then cannon, other media and other information sourses indicate Tankers and Tanker-like heroes should be heavy hitters; not debuffers or healers or anything else.
[ QUOTE ]
I agree with the earlier poster that Tankers should be better against groups as a means to preserve their role within the game. If you want a boss killer grab a Scrapper. If you want to take on an entire spawn grab a Tank.
[/ QUOTE ]
And how do you justify the hero teams's team big guy smacking around people smaller than him and then girly slapping the guys he should by all rights be able to lay into?
Tankers holding back on minions and LTs with their current mediocre damage levels at least makes thematic sense if they can unload on Bosses, AVs, etc with high damage.
NOT being able to open up on Bosses and AVs and then brutalizing the squishy enemies not only doesn't make any thematic sense, it's not very heroic in my opinion.
[ QUOTE ]
Isn't all damage on non perma-Doms being improved not just melee? Since Castle stated that the Dominator's new purpose is damage and control consecutively.
[/ QUOTE ]
And that just goes to show that an AT's purpose can change over time as the game changes.
Doms are an example of a defensive primary and an offense secondary AT that has now seen a shift to more offense. They could do both before, but now they do one better than they used to. Do they now control worse? If not, I fail to see how that is unlike Tankers. They didn't give Doms leadership abilities or invent them something new to do.
.
[ QUOTE ]
My 2 cents worth for whos listening is that stone armor brutes are like tanks the rest are more like scrappers. Stone armor brutes will pick up for tanks that want to do more damage the other AT's will be for scrapper alts. IO's already merge what roles ppl play so arguing these points are moot. The only time i notice tanks have become "tanks" again is AE content. Other than that im a weak scrapper and would be just a weak brute redside. until my team runs up against a foe that the scrapper/brute can't tank (damage mitigation through superior offense isn't enuff) i.e. 54 bosses then ppl say hey tank i love you buddy otherwise even now im disregarded. so i c this argument as an argument of the allowance of even more ppl to get the 'oneupmenship' of my AT. Logically therefor either an increase in extreme dmg mitigation required content or a redefinition of AT roles and numbers will transpire. I believe the latter will occur and this will cross ALL AT's. we can concentrate on comparing things that will probably not matter at the launch of rouge (or not matter soon after they catalog and compair data archives) or we can concentrate on acquiring the required information to successfully gauge the future direction of our beloved game. ASK questions constantly of the devs until we have more than just rampant speculation. this can be a groundbreaking expansion if handled properly and filtered through the community (in the end this game is a business and they have to cater to the needs of their customers) alot of what ppl have regarded as 'broken' can be fixed with the increased depth of choices within these AT blurs or the redefinition of roles, again IF handled properly. this will always be the point where this argument becomes productive or pointless, where we know and where we speculate
[/ QUOTE ]
Bull-hockey.
Respectfully.
In the very, very late game when everyone is IO'd the freak out, then you may be right, but that's like 10-20% of the game, perhaps even less.
I have never been in a group, as a primary scrapper player, where I've heard it said: "Don't invite the tank, Dr. Unholy can do it" and if such NONSENSE was spoken I would be quick to smack that person upside the head like the fool they are.
Even on soft-capped SR builds, if you get hit, you get brutalized and there's no real replacement for a large sack of hitpoints and the ability to be an aggro holding god.
Virtue:
Miserya - 50 EM/ELA Brute (Perma-shelved)
Adriana Rayne - 42 Katana/Dark Scrapper
Cyberpulse - 26 Super Strength/Willpower Brute
Steel Heart - 24 Invuln/Super Strength Tanker
jb did you just start in on 'canon'?
this is a unique IP. get over yourself already.
what you are proposing is game breaking. in order for it to work, all of these Colossus clones you are propsing to make would need a crap ton of magnetos to balance them out or it's going to be issue 4 all over again.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What if we go with the idea of a damage boost against Boss/EB/AV/GM class mobs?
[/ QUOTE ]
Would you accept one if it came with a corresponding decrease in defenses vs the same mobs? If the answer is yes, then you really want to play a Scrapper.
[/ QUOTE ]
I am well aware of the game balance effect and trying to discuss this civilly. No need to climb up on a high horse and tell me what I want.
"I never said thank you." - Lt. Gordon
"And you'll never have to." - the Dark Knight
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What if we go with the idea of a damage boost against Boss/EB/AV/GM class mobs?
[/ QUOTE ]
Would you accept one if it came with a corresponding decrease in defenses vs the same mobs? If the answer is yes, then you really want to play a Scrapper.
[/ QUOTE ]
I am well aware of the game balance effect and trying to discuss this civilly. No need to climb up on a high horse and tell me what I want.
[/ QUOTE ]
He's got a point, however. Traditionally scrappers are the boss/AV killers of a group, that's what they're designed to excel at. Why would it suddenly be anymore fair for a tanker to replace them in that roll? It would be like giving scrappers full gauntlet, a taunt aura, and the ability for 'Challange' to have a splash radius. Would that be fair to Tankers?
Virtue:
Miserya - 50 EM/ELA Brute (Perma-shelved)
Adriana Rayne - 42 Katana/Dark Scrapper
Cyberpulse - 26 Super Strength/Willpower Brute
Steel Heart - 24 Invuln/Super Strength Tanker
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The changes with the other AT were made to enhance the core purpose of the AT.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tankers already fulfull their core purpose too well in some cases. That is not the area causing deficiency, so it is not the area that needs attention.
Nor should we invent a "new area" for Tankers when then cannon, other media and other information sourses indicate Tankers and Tanker-like heroes should be heavy hitters; not debuffers or healers or anything else.
[ QUOTE ]
I agree with the earlier poster that Tankers should be better against groups as a means to preserve their role within the game. If you want a boss killer grab a Scrapper. If you want to take on an entire spawn grab a Tank.
[/ QUOTE ]
And how do you justify the hero teams's team big guy smacking around people smaller than him and then girly slapping the guys he should by all rights be able to lay into?
Tankers holding back on minions and LTs with their current mediocre damage levels at least makes thematic sense if they can unload on Bosses, AVs, etc with high damage.
NOT being able to open up on Bosses and AVs and then brutalizing the squishy enemies not only doesn't make any thematic sense, it's not very heroic in my opinion.
[ QUOTE ]
Isn't all damage on non perma-Doms being improved not just melee? Since Castle stated that the Dominator's new purpose is damage and control consecutively.
[/ QUOTE ]
And that just goes to show that an AT's purpose can change over time as the game changes.
Doms are an example of a defensive primary and an offense secondary AT that has now seen a shift to more offense. They could do both before, but now they do one better than they used to. Do they now control worse? If not, I fail to see how that is unlike Tankers. They didn't give Doms leadership abilities or invent them something new to do.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
lol
do you really want a dom's usefulness?
really?
i'm starting to see a pattern here. you've clearly never played villain side, have no concept of game or class balance and care only about your concept of this one class.
really are you going to start holding your breath till you get your way next?
tankers are fine. dom's will have no place when going rogue hits because a) controllers can control better and b) blasters can blast better - especially with the overwhelming MAJORITY of dom dmg dealing abilities being MELEE on a squishy.
[ QUOTE ]
jb did you just start in on 'canon'?
this is a unique IP. get over yourself already.
what you are proposing is game breaking. in order for it to work, all of these Colossus clones you are propsing to make would need a crap ton of magnetos to balance them out or it's going to be issue 4 all over again.
[/ QUOTE ]
Had JB been around for issue 4, he might know what you're talking about.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
jb did you just start in on 'canon'?
this is a unique IP. get over yourself already.
what you are proposing is game breaking. in order for it to work, all of these Colossus clones you are propsing to make would need a crap ton of magnetos to balance them out or it's going to be issue 4 all over again.
[/ QUOTE ]
Had JB been around for issue 4, he might know what you're talking about.
[/ QUOTE ]
exactly. he has no idea what he's talking about. about how tankers at one time HAD the dmg AND the super survivability. how those of us with tankers were soloing respec trials set for 8 people. and hell i was invuln/fire for pete's sake with little st dmg.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What if we go with the idea of a damage boost against Boss/EB/AV/GM class mobs?
[/ QUOTE ]
Would you accept one if it came with a corresponding decrease in defenses vs the same mobs? If the answer is yes, then you really want to play a Scrapper.
[/ QUOTE ]
I am well aware of the game balance effect and trying to discuss this civilly. No need to climb up on a high horse and tell me what I want.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'll rephrase.
Would you accept one if it came with a corresponding decrease in defenses vs the same mobs? If the answer is yes, then you might be pleased to know the option already exists: Scrappers.
Even though Scrappers do not have the same AoE capability overall that Tankers do, so buffing Tanker damage vs. Boss+ enemies will make them Boss farmers in MA missions. Oh, but wait, we'll only buff their single target attacks maybe... On thursdays falling on an odd numbered day of the month... when the player's chair faces north...
Standard Code Rant starts applying pretty quick.
[ QUOTE ]
You are misinterpreting the way in which I am using the word 'weak.' It's the single-target nature of Brute Gauntlet that makes it weak when compared to that which is given to Tankers.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're underestimating Brute's Gauntlet inherent, then, and you shouldn't do that. Because Brutes are entirely capable of pulling aggro off of Tankers, who are supposed to manage the aggro.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
By contrast, Gauntlet is an always-on effect that is very useful for the tanker's primary role in this game, which is not to deal lots of damage. Granted, it has no useful effect when solo, but Tankers don't need help to solo content unless they're going up against things not intended to be soloed.
[/ QUOTE ]
You say that like Gauntlet for Brutes isn't always on. or like their Fury isn't always on.
[/ QUOTE ]
Cherry-picking. Read and respond to the entire sentence, if you please. Brute Gauntlet isn't 'very useful' for the primary role of a Brute.
[/ QUOTE ]
Really? I'm fairly sure Gauntlet means that Brutes are being attacked more, which means their fury bar is going up from being attack, which means they're gaining a damage buff from Gauntlet's taunt effect.
Again, you're trying to downplay Brutes.
Better. 
"I never said thank you." - Lt. Gordon
"And you'll never have to." - the Dark Knight
Okay, weird idea time. What if tanker base damage was boosted by, say, 15%, but for every enemy in melee range to a max of 3, they suffered a 5% damage debuff? I think this would serve to increase tanker damage against single targets (presumably the ones that stay alive the longest -- Boss class and above), but quickly reduces their damage potential in crowds to the levels that currently exist.
1 foe in range = +10% damage
2 foes in range = +5% damage
3 or more foes in range = no change from before.
That would "penalize" a tanker managing aggro, something that a lot tankers aren't currently doing anyway (to my annoyance). I don't think it's a real penalization, but people would chose to see it that way and some would probably turn of their taunt aura - especially if they're not inv. or wp or sd.
It's wacky and it's off book, but I don't really see it working.
"Be a beacon?"
Blue Mourning: lvl. 50 Katana/DA
Bree the Barricade: lvl 50 Stone/Axe
Last Chance for Eden: lvl 50 Fire/Kin
Myra the Grey: lvl 50 Bots/Traps
1 Minute to Midnight lvl 50 Spines/DA
Suggestions need to take a few things into account.
1.Is it balanced mechanically.
2.Is it a conceptual fit with the existing game(not every individual player's vision).
3.Can it be put in place with a minimum of new code.
Frankly the first point seems to dictate that whatever happens should have a minimal effect on a solo tank. The second point is strictly a matter of choosing a fitting name.
After considerable thought how about this......
Competition.
Your foes recognize the threat you pose to their leaders. This weakens their ally buffs and foe debuffs when they are near you.
Visualize kind of an inverse of mastermind supremacy. This effect would be particularly noticable when faced with stacked enemy buffs such as nemesis veng or cimeroran status resistance. This would also come into play when faced with DE emenators, multiple tsoo sorcs, and cot mages.
This would greatly increase the appeal of a tank, or indeed multiple tanks, on a team across the level spread. So long as the effect is not too obscene, say 30% or less effect reduction, it should have hardly any effect on a solo tank.
Taking It On the Chin I-16 Tanker Guide
Repeat Offenders
[ QUOTE ]
Okay, weird idea time. What if tanker base damage was boosted by, say, 15%, but for every enemy in melee range to a max of 3, they suffered a 5% damage debuff? I think this would serve to increase tanker damage against single targets (presumably the ones that stay alive the longest -- Boss class and above), but quickly reduces their damage potential in crowds to the levels that currently exist.
1 foe in range = +10% damage
2 foes in range = +5% damage
3 or more foes in range = no change from before.
[/ QUOTE ]
Creative but it's in direct conflict with most of the powers and effects that are already in place for tankers. It does effectively display the fact that extra damage for tankers will almost certainly require a sacrifice of their primary ability.
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
I've been thinking up an alternative that meets the criteria I met in my last post and I figured I'd toss this out there (although I'm sure this has been suggested in the past in some form):
Breakdown: Enemies affected by Gauntlet (not Taunt) suffer a percentage of loss to their regeneration and recovery. For kicks, we could say this is non-stackable with other Gauntlet effects in the party (multiple Tankers), or the inverse - the amount of Gauntlet in place (more attacks over time) causes a scaling Regen reduction in targets.
The idea is simple: Instead of increasing Tanker Damage, make it so that Tankers (or teams with them) have one less obstacle to contend with against foes of increasing strength and HP: Their high Regeneration values. Minions would barely feel this. LTs would probably be barely phased by it. Bosses would require fewer blows (in the early game, this would make things far less taxing for the current endurance-heavy Tanker), and AVs would seem far less resiliant. Further complicating the mix, faster attacks (usually weaker ones) would provide a better benefit to this inherit than constantly using the strongest attacks in your arsenal, creating an option for alternating attack styles to keep opponents softened up.
It's said that the little things are what truly break a man down.
And, in the case of dealing with AI opponents, I've always considered regeneration to be an absurd obstacle. It exists solely to remind you that no matter how well you can break through their resistances or defenses, they're still better than you because you can't deal enough DPS to stay above the damage treadmill.
In PvP, this would obviously have be reduced (or removed entirely). Any thoughts?
Raid Leader of Task Force Vendetta "Steel 70", who defeated the first nine Drop Ships in the Second Rikti War.
70 Heroes, 9 Drop Ships, 7 Minutes. The Aliens never knew what hit them.
Now soloing: GM-Class enemy Adamaster, with a Tanker!
[ QUOTE ]
Suggestions need to take a few things into account.
1.Is it balanced mechanically.
2.Is it a conceptual fit with the existing game(not every individual player's vision).
3.Can it be put in place with a minimum of new code.
Frankly the first point seems to dictate that whatever happens should have a minimal effect on a solo tank. The second point is strictly a matter of choosing a fitting name.
After considerable thought how about this......
Competition.
Your foes recognize the threat you pose to their leaders. This weakens their ally buffs and foe debuffs when they are near you.
Visualize kind of an inverse of mastermind supremacy. This effect would be particularly noticable when faced with stacked enemy buffs such as nemesis veng or cimeroran status resistance. This would also come into play when faced with DE emenators, multiple tsoo sorcs, and cot mages.
This would greatly increase the appeal of a tank, or indeed multiple tanks, on a team across the level spread. So long as the effect is not too obscene, say 30% or less effect reduction, it should have hardly any effect on a solo tank.
[/ QUOTE ]
This has some definite possibilities. While I would personally like to see a new tanker mechanic be something more tactile and proactive I can't really fault this idea. I vote for a name change from Competition to Opposition. It's a better PR move. 
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
[ QUOTE ]
I've been thinking up an alternative that meets the criteria I met in my last post and I figured I'd toss this out there (although I'm sure this has been suggested in the past in some form):
Breakdown: Enemies affected by Gauntlet (not Taunt) suffer a percentage of loss to their regeneration and recovery. For kicks, we could say this is non-stackable with other Gauntlet effects in the party (multiple Tankers), or the inverse - the amount of Gauntlet in place (more attacks over time) causes a scaling Regen reduction in targets.
The idea is simple: Instead of increasing Tanker Damage, make it so that Tankers (or teams with them) have one less obstacle to contend with against foes of increasing strength and HP: Their high Regeneration values. Minions would barely feel this. LTs would probably be barely phased by it. Bosses would require fewer blows (in the early game, this would make things far less taxing for the current endurance-heavy Tanker), and AVs would seem far less resiliant. Further complicating the mix, faster attacks (usually weaker ones) would provide a better benefit to this inherit than constantly using the strongest attacks in your arsenal, creating an option for alternating attack styles to keep opponents softened up.
It's said that the little things are what truly break a man down.
And, in the case of dealing with AI opponents, I've always considered regeneration to be an absurd obstacle. It exists solely to remind you that no matter how well you can break through their resistances or defenses, they're still better than you because you can't deal enough DPS to stay above the damage treadmill.
In PvP, this would obviously have be reduced (or removed entirely). Any thoughts?
[/ QUOTE ]
Love it.
Virtue:
Miserya - 50 EM/ELA Brute (Perma-shelved)
Adriana Rayne - 42 Katana/Dark Scrapper
Cyberpulse - 26 Super Strength/Willpower Brute
Steel Heart - 24 Invuln/Super Strength Tanker
Ladies,
Don't forget that SoA with leaderships can turn almost everyone to god-mode like Defense.
Who wants Tanker and Brute??
I've been running hard AE mish and I try NOT to invite Brute because Brute players are so anal about their playing style. They always say "SB please!" or "don't knockback!", "let me herd first!!" or "don't use confuse".
Just invite 1-2 SoA and everyone can do whatever they want. Problem solved!
PS: I would invite Scrapper over Brute most of the time... and if I really want tanking, I would pick Tanker because most of Tanker players actually care about aggro-control; whereas most Brutes care more about how much damage they can sustain. There is a difference...
What's left is to normalize all Assassin Strikes and improve Stalker's old sets (Claw, MA and EM)! You don't need to bring back the missing PbAoE attack. You just need to make the existing ones better! For example, make Slice a WIDER and LONGER cone.
[ QUOTE ]
whereas most Brutes care more about how much damage they can sustain.[/b] There is a difference...
[/ QUOTE ]
We kind of have to be. Cause, you know, if we don't sustain a decent amount of fury we're like Tankers without the defense and aggro abilities.
Virtue:
Miserya - 50 EM/ELA Brute (Perma-shelved)
Adriana Rayne - 42 Katana/Dark Scrapper
Cyberpulse - 26 Super Strength/Willpower Brute
Steel Heart - 24 Invuln/Super Strength Tanker
[ QUOTE ]
For the simple reason that any change that doesn't affect Tanker damage, isn't going to help their concept deficiency, which is where I say they are lacking the most. Other areas where they're lacking (endurance use, the early-mid levels stretch, being called "boring" by many) can all be tied to damage and offense issues.
[/ QUOTE ]
You treat this concept deficiency as if it was fact. It is not. That statement is your opinion JB not, fact.
[ QUOTE ]
The recent revisions to the AT's inherents can be see as an attempt to make them more rounded.
[/ QUOTE ]
Again opinion. My opinion is that the changes were made to make the AT's less frustrating and more attractive in a teaming environment.
[ QUOTE ]
Blasters, an AT primarily about damage, got a form of mez protection to make them more survivable in addition to increasing their damage output.
[/ QUOTE ]
Blasters got Defiance 2.0 to allow the AT to use its primary defense (damage) more reliably. The damage buff you refer to actually lowered the possible damage buff since before a blaster below 10% hit points could hit the damage cap simply through defiance. The defiance change made the buff more reliable and in line with the purpose of the AT.
[ QUOTE ]
Stalkers, another damage AT, got the demoralizing effect which also helps their survivability, not to mention staying hidden from missed Assassination.
[/ QUOTE ]
Again a change made to make stalkers more survivable in team environments and more attractive overall.
[ QUOTE ]
These changes improved the survivability for these primarily offensive ATs, making them more rounded and less frustrating to play.
[/ QUOTE ]
We agree.
[ QUOTE ]
Why then, should it be off the table for a primarily survivable AT to get improved offense to make them more rounded and fun to play?
[/ QUOTE ]
The changes with the other AT were made to enhance the core purpose of the AT. I.E. in these cases damage. The core purpose of Tankers is survivability. If a change to base damage were to be made it would have to be:
<ul type="square">[*]Small enough that their damage would still be under ever other damage primary melee AT[*]Not be so large as to lower tanker defenses or aggro control capability. [*]If meant to address leveling speed or endurance usage would have to be consistent and not burst (aka Tankomination) in order for the effect to be appreciable.[/list]
Given all of these conditions making Tankers more like other AT seems a lackluster solution. Since every other Melee AT would still have better damage. Tankers need to offer something or a conglomerations to the team that is uniquely them.
[ QUOTE ]
It should very much be on the table.
[/ QUOTE ]
No I t really shouldn't be on the table except as a last resort since it will be ineffectual.
[ QUOTE ]
And since Tankers currently do two things: they tank with their primary and attack with their offensive secondary, making them more rounded would involve improving on their secondary's offense.
[/ QUOTE ]
A good Tanker uses both their primary and secondary to tank. Making them more well rounded in this case would be an inadequate solution as Tankers are a specialist character by design. Tankers may need something that will make them more attractive in team play. This extra something should ideally help the tanker in solo play if possible within game balance. I still think being given Defender / Controller level leadership buffs is a good place to start. I agree with the earlier poster that Tankers should be better against groups as a means to preserve their role within the game. If you want a boss killer grab a Scrapper. If you want to take on an entire spawn grab a Tank.
[ QUOTE ]
Not to mention now there's a precident for improving a melee damage secondary:
Dominators.
[/ QUOTE ]
Isn't all damage on non perma-Doms being improved not just melee? Since Castle stated that the Dominator's new purpose is damage and control consecutively.